CIRCULARS OF REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES 1990

PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE CIRCULARS ARE NOT CORRECTLY PROOFREAD WITH ORIGINALS. SO KINDLY MAKE SURE THAT THEY MATCH WITH THE ORIGINAL CIRCULARS/ ORDERS. IF THERE IS ANY FONT PROBLEM PLEASE INSTAL ML-TT-KARTHIKA FONTS. FONT PROBLEMS UPTO A LEVEL CAN BE OVERCOME BY COPYING AND PASTING THE POST IN A WORD DOCUMENT. IF A LETTER NDA IS MISSING, INSTAL MLTTKARTHIKA FONT AND TYPE ALT+0173 FOR NDA.

\¼À ]n.än(2) 2452/89         

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{Smdm^okv,

                                           Xncph\´]pcw, 3þ1þ1990

kÀ¡peÀ \¼À 2/90

hnjbw: kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnbtâbpw kÀ¡nÄ klIcW bqWnbtâbpw {]hÀ¯\hpw ^­p ]ncnhpw kw_Ôn¨v \nÀt±i§Ä ]pds¸Sphn¡p¶p. 

kqN\:   ]n.än.(2) 2452/89 XobXn 17þ1þ89

kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb\pw kÀ¡nÄ klIcW bqWnb\pIfpw GtIm]n¨v {]hÀ¯n¨v ChnsS A\utZymKnI klIcW¯nsâ apJy Bhiy§fmb t\XrXz ]cnioe\w, AwK§fpsS hnZym`ymkw, Poh\¡mcpsS ]cnioe\w Chbpw kwL§fpsS GtIm]nX {]hÀ¯\w, AwK kwL§Ä X½nepff klIcWw Chbpw km²yam¡n¯oÀt¡­XmsW¶v \nbahpw N«§fpw hnh£ sNbvXn«ps­¦nepw Cu Imcy¯nÂ- th­{X {i² sNep¯p¶Xmbn ImWp¶nÃ.  AXpt]mse Xs¶ kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnbtâbpw kÀ¡nÄ klIcW bqWnbtâbpw [\mKa amÀ¤§fpw icnbmbn D]tbmKs¸Sp¯p¶Xmbn ImWp¶nsöp am{Xaà CXn\v icnbmb \nb{´W§fpw DffXmbn ImWp¶nÃ.  N«w 147  ]dbpw {]Imcw ap³ hÀjs¯ hchv sNehv IW¡pIfpw {]hÀ¯\ dnt¸mÀ«pw hcpw sImÃs¯ _UvPäpw t{]m{KmapIfpw D­m¡n kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb\pw cPnkv{SmÀ¡pw kÀ¡nÄ bqWnb\pIÄ \ÂIWsa¶mWv hyhkvY.  kÀ¡nÄ klIcW bqWnb\pIfpsS sk{I«dnbmbn {]hÀ¯nt¡­Xpw {]hÀ¯n¡p¶Xpw kÀ¡nfnse IqSpX kÀhokpw ]cnNbhpapff  Un¸mÀ«psaâv C³kvs]IvSdmbncp¶n«pw Cu Imcyw Bhiys¸«n«pt]mepw \S¸n hcp¶nsöXpw kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb\n \n¶pw \ÂInbn«pff cioXp _p¡v D]tbmKn¨v ]ncn¡p¶ A^nentb³ ^oknsâ hnhc§fpw 25% am{Xw kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb\v AwKoIcn¨Xp {]Imcw \ÂIp¶nsöXpw Gähpw tJZIchpw in£mÀlhpamsW¶pffXn\p ]pdta Un¸mÀ«psaânsâ kÂt¸cn\v If¦w NmÀ¯p¶ kmlNcyw D­m¡pIbpamWv.  Cu A\mkvYbpw sXämb {]hÀ¯\hpw AXmXnsâ Xcw t]mse \S]SnIÄ¡v hnt[bam¡p¶Xn\p ]pdta Cu AhkvY XpScmXncn¡m\pff IÀi\amb \nÀt±i§fpw Bhiyambn ImWp¶p.  Cu kmlNcy¯n Xmsg ]dbpw {]Imcw \nÀt±i§Ä _Ôs¸« FÃmhÀ¡pambn \ÂIp¶p.

1.     N«w 147  ]dª {]Imcw Ignª sImÃs¯ {]hÀ¯\ dnt¸mÀ«pw hchv sNehv IW¡pIfpw hcpw sImÃs¯ _UvPäpw t{]m{KmapIfpw kÀ¡nÄ bqWnb\pIÄ Hmtcm hÀjmhkm\w Ignªv 3 amk¯n\pffnse¦nepw kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb\pw ]IÀ¸v PnÃm tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀ¡pw \nÀ_Ôambpw Abt¡­XmWv.  1988þ89 se hchv sNehv IW¡pIfpw {]hÀ¯\ dnt¸mÀ«pw 89 90 se _UvPäpw t{]m{KmapIfpw C{]Imcw D­m¡n ]camh[n 31þ1þ90 \p ap¼v kaÀ¸nt¡­XpamWv.  tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀamÀ Cu Imcy¯n \nXm´ Pm{KX ]peÀt¯­Xpw hogvN hcp¯p¶ sk{I«dnamcpsS t]cn bpIvXamb \S]SnIÄ kzoIcnt¡­XpamWv. 

2.     kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb³ \ÂInbn«pff cioXp _p¡pIÄ D]tbmKn¨v A^nentbj³/dn\}h ^okv kÀ¡nfnse FÃm {]hÀ¯\ £aXbpff kwL§fn \n¶pw IpSninIbS¡w 89þ90 hsc 28þ2þ90 ap¼v CuSmt¡­Xpw Un.kn._n.cPnkvädpIÄ kÀ¡nfn kq£nt¡­XpamWv.  A§s\ CuSm¡p¶ hcnkwJybpsdS 25%  kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb\v kwL§fpsS t]À hnhchpw Uq¹nt¡äv ckoXpIfpaS¡w amkmamkw \ÂtI­Xpw kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb³ \ÂIp¶ A^nentbj³/dn\}h kÀ«n^n¡äv AS¡apff ckoXpIÄ kwL§Ä¡v \ÂtI­XpamWv.  Cu Imcy¯n bmsXmcp hn«phogvNbpw A\phZn¡p¶nsöpw ]Wkw_Ôamb Cu CS]mSn IrXyX ]men¡m¯hcpsS t]cn kXzcw tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀamÀ \S]Sn kzoIcnt¡­XmsW¶pw \nÀt±in¡p¶p.  kÀ¡nÄ bqWnb\pIfpsS BUnäv \S¯p¶ BUnäÀamÀ kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb³ \ÂInbn«pff ckoXv ]pkvXI§Ä \mÄ hgnbpambn ]cntim[n¨v Ah IW¡n sIm­ph¶n«ps­¶pw \nÀt±ia\pkcn¨v {]hÀ¯\£aamb FÃm kwL§fn \n¶pw X³ hÀjw hscbpff hcn kwJy ]ncn¨n«ps­¶Xpw AXn kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnbsâ hnlnXw \ÂInbn«ps­¶Xpw kÀ¡nÄ A^nentbäp sNbvXhcpsS Unkn._n cPnkvädn IrXyambn FgpXnbn«ps­¶Xpw Dd¸p hcp¯­XmWv.  kÀ¡nÄ bqWnb\pIfpsS BUnäv dnt¸mÀ«n {]kvXpX Imcy§Ä hyIvXamt¡­Xpw kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb\v hnlnXw \ÂIm³ _m¡nbpffXnsâ hniZ hnhc§Ä- DÄs¡mffp¶ Hcp kvtääpsaâv  kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb\v dnt¸mÀ«v AwKoIcn¨v \ÂIp¶ A[nImcnIÄ hogvN IqSmsX taen Ab¨p sImSpt¡­XpamWv. 

3.     hnZym`ymk ^­v kw_Ôn¨v BUnäv dnt¸mÀ«v AwKoIcn¡pt¼mÄ _m¡n hnhcw kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnbs\ Adnbn¡Wsa¶ \nehnepff \nÀt±iw IrXyambn ]ment¡­XmWv. IqSmsX BUnän\mbpw ta t\m«¯n\mbpw ]cntim[\¡mbpw kwLw kµÀin¡p¶ DtZymKkvY³amÀ Cu ^­v AS¡p¶Xn\pff \nba_m²yXbn kwL¡mÀ hogvN hcp¯p¶nsöv Dd¸p hcpt¯­Xpw hogvN hcp¯p¶ hnhcw tPmbnâv cPnkv{Smsd Adnbnt¡­XpamWv.  BUnänepff D¯chv {]Imcw kÀ«n^n¡äv In«n 2 amk§Ä¡Iw hnZym`ymk ^­v AS¡phm³ hogvN hcp¯nbhcpsS Imcy¯n tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀ Hcp kab]cn[n h¨v AS¨v dnt¸mÀ«v kaÀ¸n¡phm³ \nÀt±iw \ÂtI­Xpw \nbam\pkrXambn FgpXn Ab¨ D¯chv A{]Imcw \S¸nem¡m¯ ]£w \nba{]Imcw ta \S]SnIÄ kzoIcnt¡­XpamWv. 

4.     kÀ¡nÄ bqWnb\pIfnte¡v kwkvYm\ klIcW bqWnb\n A^nentbäp sNbvX kwL§Ä am{Xta {]Xn\n[nIsf Ab¡mhp F¶XmWv \nbaw.  CXv Adntb­Xnte¡pw {]mhÀ¯nI amt¡­Xnte¡pw {]hÀ¯\ £aXbpff kÀ¡nÄ Xe¯nepff FÃm klIcW kwL§fn \n¶pw A^nentbj³ ^okpw dn\}h ^okpw CuSmt¡­Xpw kÀ¡nÄ bqWnb\n Ah tcJs¸Sp¯n cPnkväÀ kq£nt¡­Xpw AXymhiyamWv.  IqSmsX Cu A^nentbj³ \ne\nÀ¯msX klIcW  kwL§Ä¡v bmsXmcp hn[ B\pIqey§Ä¡pw AÀlXbnsömWv \nbaw hyIvXam¡nbn«pffsX¶pw Hmtcm kÀ¡nfnepapff kwLw `mchmlnItfbpw HmÀ½n¸nt¡­XpamWv. 

5.     kwkvYm\ klIcW _m¦v PnÃm klIcW _m¦pIÄ aäv A¸Ivkv kwL§-Ä tI{µ kwL§Ä aäp _Ôs¸« kwL§Ä Chbpw [\klmb§-Ä¡pfftXm atäm Bb, klIcW kwL§fn \n¶pff At]£IÄ ]cnKWn¡p¶Xn\p apt¼ \nba{]Imcw Ah kwkvYm\ klIcW bpWnb\pambn A^nentbäp sNbvXn«ps­¶pw A^nentbj³ \ne\nÀ¯p¶ps­¶pw ]cntim[n¨ Dd¸p hcpt¯­XpamWv.  AÃmsX km¼¯nItam aäp Xc¯nepfftXm Bb B\pIqey§Ä¡v AÀlXbnÃm¯XmIp¶p.

6.     Hmtcm PnÃbntebpw hnZym`ymk ]cnioe\ ]cn]mSnIÄ ka{Kambn Akq{XWw sN¿p¶Xn\pw \S¸m¡p¶Xn\pw hnebncp¯p¶Xn\pw Kh¬saâv Xs¶ Hmtcm PnÃmXe kanXn¡v AwKoImcw \ÂIn D¯chv \ÂIp¶Xn\p th­nbpff \S]Snbpw XpScp¶p­v.  AXp \nehn hcpt¼mÄ BXvamÀXvYamb {]hÀ¯\w \St¯­XmsW¶pw \nÀt±in¡p¶p. 

ta FgpXnb \nÀt±i§Ä _Ôs¸« FÃmhcpw kXzcw ]ment¡­Xpw taet\zjW¯n\pw HmUnän\pw D¯chmZs¸«hÀ Ah Dd¸p hcpt¯­XpamWv. 

]n. {]`mIc³

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{SmÀ

No. L.O.50379/90.     

Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies,

                                              Trivandrum, 22-9-1990

CIRCULAR No. 3/90

Sub:   Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969- Sections 82 and 87- Dispute relating to conditions of service of an employee of Co-operative Society-Assistant Registrar passing a composite order on of the merits as well as objection relating to his jurisdiction-Appeal is maintainable under S. 82- Revision under S. 87 not entertainable by Government.

This is to bring  to the notice of all Departmental Officers that the Hon. Supreme Court of India had occasion to decide in Raghavan V.  the Secretary to Government, on the question whether an appeal is maintainable under Section 82 when an Assistant Registrar had passed a composite order deciding the dispute on merit as well as the objections relating to his jurisdiction and whether Revision under Section 87 is entertainable by Government in such circumstances:

The facts of the case and the decisions of the Hon. Court are reproduced below for the information and future guidance of all Officers of this Department.

“A dispute relating to conditions of service was raised by the employees of the Co-operative Society and the same was referred by the Registrar to the Assistant Registrar for adjudication in accordance with S.70 of the Act.  The  Assistant Registrar to whom the dispute was referred decided the dispute on merit and while doing so he rejected the objections raised on behalf of the Respondent No.5 that the matter referred to him did not constitute a dispute as defined by Clause (i) of S.2 of the Act.  Thus the Assistant Registrar disposed of the dispute on merit and also the objections of the Respondent No.2 by a composite order.  The Respondent No.2 thereupon filed a Revision Petition before the State Government under S.82 of the Act.  The State Government took cognizance of the Revision and issued an interim order. The appellant filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Kerala High Court challenging the jurisdiction of the State Government in entertaining the Revision.  A learned Single Judge held that the State Government had no jurisdiction to entertain the Revision.  On Letters Patent  Appeal, a Division Bench of the High Court held that the State Government had jurisdiction to hear the Revision-view of S.69 (4) of the Act.”

On the basis of the above facts, the Court held that “since Assistant Registrar had passed a composite order deciding the dispute on merits as well as the objections relating to his jurisdiction, proper remedy for the respondent was to file appeal under S. 82 of the Act before the Appellate Authority constituted under the Act.  Since the dispute had been decided on merit the appellate authority could decide the question relating to jurisdiction also. Section 87  which provide for revision before the Registrar or the State Government lays down that Revision would lie only in those matters where no appeal lies.  Since in the  instant case the dispute had already been decided on merits, appeal was maintainable under Section 82 of the Act.  Therefore no revision was maintainable under S. 87 of the Act.  We, therefore, hold that the State Government had no jurisdiction to entertain the Revision against the order of the Assistant Registrar”.

All the Officers in the Department will note the above decision of the Hon. Supreme Court for future guidance.

For Registrar of Co-operative Societies

No.MP (1) 60975/89. 

Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies,

                                             Thiruvananthapuram, 12-1-1990

CIRCULAR No.4/90

Sub:   Co-operative Department-NCDC III Co-op: Storage Project-construction of godown-Utilisation of General Fund/building Fund by societies-Instruction issued.

Read: This office Circular No.47/88 dt. 22-12-88

In the office Circular read above, instructions had been given to the Joint Registrar to observe certain points while according permission to the societies to invest General Funds for the purpose of construction of godown sanctioned under NCDC III Co-operative Storage Project.  Among other things it was instructed that only the amount equal to the maximum of 25 % of the cost of godown need be allowed to be diverted from the general funds for the purpose. Instances have come to the notice of the undersigned that many of the societies have invested own funds over and above the above percentage in view of increase in the cost of construction over the estimated cost.  This increase is attributable to the increase in cost of labour and material over PWD schedule of rates.  This phenomena has necessitated a reconsideration of the matter.

2.       In partial modification of the earlier instructions contained in the above circular all Joint Registrars are therefore requested that the societies seeking sanctions to utilise own funds may be permitted to invest funds from general funds an amount equal to that which is required in excess of the financial assistance sanctioned to the societies for the construction of godown under NCDC III storage project, taking into consideration the cost of constructions approved by competent authorities.

P. Prabhakaran

Registrar of Co-operative Societies

\¼À Pn.1688/90       

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{Smdm^okv,

                                           Xncph\´]pcw, 20þ1þ90

kÀ¡peÀ \¼À 5/90

hnjbw:  {]mYanI klIcW kwL§fn emâv cPnkväÀ kq£n¡p¶Xv kw_Ôn¨v. 

Hmtcm {]mYanI ImÀjnI klIcW kwL¯nsâ Hmtcm AwK¯ntâbpw ssIhiapff `qanbpsS hnkvXoÀ®w, IrjncoXn, hnfIÄ XpS§nb hniZ hnhc§Ä kw_Ôn¨pff kvYnXn hnhc§Ä DÄs¡mffp¶ Hcp emâv cPnkväÀ FgpXn kq£n¡Wsa¶v hyIvXambn t\ct¯ \nÀt±iw \ÂInbn«pffXmWv.  BbXn\v Hcp ^mdw dnkÀhv _m¦v \nÀt±in¨n«pffXmWv.

F¶m C{]Imcw \nÀt±in¨ emâv cPnkväÀ an¡ {]mYanI klIcW kwL§fnepw Ct¸mÄ IrXyambpw icnbmbpw FgpXn kq£níp¶nsöp ImWp¶p.  kwL§fn kq£n¡p¶ cPnkvädpIÄ Xs¶ ]e coXn bnepffhbmWv F¶pw ImWp¶p.  Ahbn \n¶pw IrXyhpw ]qÀ®hpamb hnhc§Ä CXpaqew Adnbphm\pw km[n¡p¶nÃ.  21þ12þ89  IqSnb klIcW skan\mdn ]s¦Sp¯psIm­v {]mYanI ImÀjnI klIcW kwL§Ä emâv cPnkväÀ IrXyambn FgpXn kq£nt¡­Xnsâ BhiyIXsb¸än _lp: klIcW hIp¸p a{´n hniZambn {]Xn]mZn¡pIbp­mbn.

kwkvYm\ klIcW _m¦nsâ t\XrXz¯n \S¸m¡m³ Dt±in¡p¶ klIcW k¼À¡ ]cn]mSnbn FÃm {]mYanI klIcW kwL§fpw emâv cPnkväÀ icnbmbpw IrXyambpw FgpXn kq£n¡p¶Xn\v {]m[m\yw \ÂInbn«p­v.  kwkvYm\ klIcW _m¦v emâv cPnkvädnsâ Hcp amXrIm ^mdw Cu Hm^okn kaÀ¸n¨n«p­v.  AXv dnkÀhv _m¦v \nÀt±in¨ ^md¯n Bhiys¸Sp¶ hnhc§Ä¡pw ]pdta Iptd¡qSn hnhc§Ä \ÂI¯¡ hn[w cq]s¸Sp¯nbXmWv.  AXv AwKoIcn¨v CtXmsSm¸w tNÀ¯ncn¡p¶p.  CX\pkcn¨pff Hcp emâv cPnkväÀ FÃm {]mYanI ImÀjnI klIcW kwL§fpw FgpXn kq£nt¡­XmWv.  5 hÀjw IqSpt¼mÄ Bhiyamb hnhc§Ä tNÀ¯v Cu cPnkväÀ Hmtcm kwLhpw ]pXpt¡­XmWv. 

FÃm kwL§fpw AhbpsS {]hÀ¯\ ]cn[nbnepff Hmtcm IpSpw_¯ntâbpw ssIhi `qanbpsS hniZhnhc§Ä AS§p¶ emâv cPnkväÀ FgpXn kq£n¡p¶ps­¶v klIcW hIp¸ntebpw, PnÃm _m¦ntebpw _Ôs¸« DtZymKkvY³amÀ Dd¸p hcpt¯­XmWv. Hmtcm kÀ¡nfntebpw CXp kw_-Ôn¨ ]ptcmKXn amkmamkw IqSp¶ Aknkväâv cPnkv{SmÀamcpsS tbmK¯n tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀ hnebncpt¯­XmWv. 

]n. {]`mIc³

klIcW kwLw cPnkv{SmÀ

\¼À C.Fw.(2) 807/90

klIcW kwLw cPnkv{SmÀ B^okv

                                       Xncph\´]pcw, 5þ2þ1990

kÀ¡peÀ \¼À 7/90

hnjbw: klIcW kwL§fnse Poh\¡mÀ¡v kd­À Ah[n A\phZn¡p¶Xp kw_Ôn¨v

kqN\:   1þ11þ1989 se Pn.H.(]n)þ480/89/^n³.\¼À kÀ¡mÀ D¯chv

klIcW N«§fnse, N«w 190 (8) A\pkcn¨v klIcW kwLw Poh\¡mc\v kÀ¡mÀ Poh\¡mÀ¡v _m[Iamb coXnbnÂ, BÀPnXmh[n kd­À sNbvXv XpI hm§m³ AhImiap­v.  kd­À sN¿p¶ BÀPnXmh[n Imet¯¡v kÀ¡mÀ Poh\¡mÀ¡v sImSpt¡­ Ah[n i¼fw IW¡m¡p¶ Imcys¯¡pdn¨v kqN\bnse kÀ¡mÀ D¯chn 1þ12þ1989 apX¡v {]m_yet¯mSpIqSn \nÀt±i§Ä ]pds¸Sphn¨n«p­v.  AXp {]Imcw kd­À sN¿p¶ Hmtcm Znhks¯ BÀPnXmh[n¡pw Ah[n¡met¯¡v IW¡m¡p¶ amk i¼f¯nsâ 1/30 `mKw F¶ tXmXn Ah[n i¼fw IW¡mt¡­XmWv.  ta ]dª kÀ¡mÀ D¯chnsâ {]kIvX `mKw Xmsg {]tXyIw tNÀ¯n«p­v.

Extract of G.O. (P) 480/89 Fin dated, 1-11-1989.

XXVII-Surrender of Earned Leave.

“52 Leave Salary for leave surrendered will be calculated at 1/30th of the monthly salary per day irrespective of the month in which it is surrendered and the maximum limit of surrender of Earned Leave admissible at the time of retirement will be enhanced to 240 days in modification of the existing provisions for surrender of earned Leave . 

(The above rule will take effect from 1-12-1989 per para 54 of the G.O. )

ta¸dª \nÀt±i§Ä, klIcW kwLw Poh\¡mÀ¡pw 1þ12þ1989 apX _m[IamsW¶ Imcyw {i²bn s]Sp¯p¶p.  C¡mcyw FÃm klIcW kwL§fptSbpw {i²bn sIm­p htc­XmWv.

klIcW kwLw cPnkv{SmÀ

\¼À kn.Fkv.(2) 14438/89   

klIcW kwLw cPnkv{Smdm^okv

                                          Xncph\´]pcw, 11þ3þ90

kÀ¡peÀ \¼À 11/90

hnjbw: klIcW kvYm]\§Ä 1958 se Fwt¹mbokv t{]mhnU­v ^­v \nba¯ntebpw 1948 se Fwt¹mbokv kvtääv C³jzd³kv \nba¯ntebpw hyhkvYIÄ \S¸nemt¡­Xp kw_Ôn¨v.

1958 se Fwt¹mbokv t{]mhnU­v ^­v \nbaw 1948 se Fwt¹mbokv kvtääv C³jzd³kv \nbaw C¶o tI{µ \nba§fpsS ]cn[nbn- hcp¶ klIcW kvYm]\§Ä {]kvXpX \nba§fnse {]kIvX§fmb hyhkvYIÄ ]men¡p¶nà F¶pff kwKXn cPnkv{SmdpsS {i²bn s]«n«p­v.  Cu \nba§fnse hyhkvYIÄ ]qÀ®ambn ]ment¡­ NpaXe \nbaw _m[n¡p¶ Hmtcm kwL¯n\pw Ds­¶p Nq­n¡mWn¡phm³ B{Kln¡p¶p. Fwt¹mbokv t{]mhnU­v ^­v hnlnXw HSp¡p¶Xn Xncph\´]pcw PnÃbntebpw CSp¡n PnÃbntebpw Nne kwL§Ä hogvN hcp¯nbXn\m Cu kvYm]\§fnse {][m\ DtZymKkvY³ {Inan\ t{]mknI}j³ \S]SnIÄ¡v hnt[bcmtI­n h¶p F¶ kwKXn _Ôs¸« FÃmhÀ¡pw km[\m]mTamIpsa¶v IcpXp¶p.

2.     ta \nba§fpsS ]cn[nbn- hcp¶ klIcW kvYm]\§Ä Sn \nba§fnse hyhkvYIÄ ]qÀ®ambpw ]men¡p¶ps­¶pw, C¡mcy¯n hogvN kw`hníp¶nsöpw Dd¸p hct¯­ NpaXe {]kvXpX kvYm]\§fnse apJy Imcy \nÀhlW DtZymKkY³amÀ¡pw `cW kanXn AwK§Ä¡pw DffXmWv.  C¡mcy¯n D­mIp¶ hogvN _Ôs¸«  kvYm]\§fnse apJy Imcy \nÀhlW DtZymKkY³amÀs¡Xnsc t{]mknI}j³ \S]SnIÄ kzoIcn¡p¶Xn\p ImcWamIp¶ IpäambXn\m 1958 se Fwt¹mbokv t{]mhnU­v ^­v \nbaw 1948 se Fwt¹mbokv kvtääv C³jzd³kv \nbaw F¶o tI{µ \nba§fnse ]cn[nbn hcp¶ klIcW kvYm]\§Ä Cu \nba§fnse hyhkvYIÄ ]men¡p¶Xp kw_Ôn¨v Xmsg ]dbp¶ \nÀt±i§Ä CXn\m \ÂInbncn¡p¶p.

1)     apIfn ]dª c­p tI{µ \nba§fntebpw hyhkvYIfn Hmtcm kvYm]\¯n\p _m[Iamb hyhkvYIÄ bmsXmcp hogvNbpw IqSmsX ]qÀ®ambpw ]ment¡­XmWv.

2)     \nba hyhkvYIÄ {]Imcw kvYm]\w AXmXp kabw HSpt¡­ XpIIÄ \nivNnX kab ]cn[n¡Iw Xs¶ HSpt¡­XmWv,  Cu C\¯n HSpt¡­ XpIIÄ Hcn¡epw,þHcp ImcW himepwþIpSninIbmIm³ ]mSnÃ.

3)     km¼¯nI _p²nap«v A\p`hs¸Sp¶ kvYm]\§Ä aäp km¼¯nI _m[yXIÄ XoÀ¡p¶Xp \nÀ¯n h¨v Cu \nba hyhkvYI-Ä {]Imcapff XpIIÄ ap³KW\ \ÂIn bYm kabw HSpt¡­XmWv. 

4)     [\tijn Ipdª kvYm]\§Ä Cu hI \nbam[njvTnX km[yXIÄ \ndthäphm³ th­n hcp¶ kwJyIÄ bYm kabw e`yamIp¶Xn\mbn Bhiyamb GÀ¸mSpIÄ- Imte Iq«n sNt¿­XmWv.

ta \nba§fnse hyhkvYIÄ \S¸nem¡p¶Xn klIcW kvYm]\§fpsS `mK¯p \n¶p­mIp¶ GsXmcp hogvNbpw Kuchambn ho£n¡p¶Xpw \nba ewL\¯n\pw, \nba hyhkvYIÄ \S¸nem¡p¶Xnep­mb hogvN¡pw kvYm]\¯nepw AXnse D¯chmZs¸« DtZymKkvY\psaXnsc \S]SnIÄ kzoIcn¡p¶Xpambncn¡pw.

Cu kÀ¡peÀ ssI¸änb hnhcw FÃm PnÃm sam¯ hym]mc klIcW D]t`mIvXr kvtämdpIfptSbpw amt\PnwKv UbdIvSÀamÀ aS¡¯]men Adnbnt¡­XmWv.

]n. {]`mIc³

klIcW kwLw cPnkv{SmÀ

\¼À C.Fw.(2) 28183/88      

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{Smdm^okv,

                                           Xncph\´]pcw, 22þ3þ90

kÀ¡peÀ \¼À 12/90

hnjbw:  klIcW hIp¸vþklIcW kL§fn Poh\¡msc aXvkc ]co£ hgn sXcsªSp¯v \nba\w \S¯p¶ \S]SnIfn klIcW hIp¸v DtZymKkvY³amÀ DÄs¸Sp¶Xp hne¡p¶Xp kw_Ôn¨ \nÀt±i§Ä

kqN\:   Cu B^oknse 22þ7þ90 se Cw.Fw.31407/80 \¼À kÀ¡peÀ (kÀ¡peÀ \¼À 52/80).

kqN\bnse kÀ¡pednse \nÀt±i§Ä  A\pkcn¨v klIcW kwL§fn Poh\¡msc \nban¡p¶Xn\mbn DtZymKmÀXvYnIÄ¡p th­n \S¯p¶ Fgp¯p ]co£bpw AXp kw_Ôn¨ aäp tPmenIfpw kwL¯n\p shfnbnepff Hcp GP³knsb sIm­v \S¯nt¡­XmWv.  F¶m ]e kwL§fpw Sn \nba\w \S¯p¶Xn\pff {]mcw` tPmenIÄ¡pw Fgp¯p ]co£ XpS¯nbh \S¯p¶Xn\p th­n Cu hIp¸nse DtZymKkvY³amsc kao]n¡p¶Xmbpw AhcpsS tkh\w Bhiys¸Sp¶Xmbpw ]e DtZymKkvY³amcpw Cu tPmen GsäSp¯p \S¯p¶Xmbpw {i²bn s]«ncn¡p¶p.

tIcf kÀhokv dqÄknse dqÄ 46 {]Imcw, kÀ¡mÀ DtZymKkvY³amÀ AhcpsS DtZymK ]cn[n¡p ]pd¯v GsX¦nepw tPmen kzoIcn¡Wsa¦nÂ, BbXv kÀ¡mcn \n¶pw A\phmZw hm§nbncnt¡­XmWv.  A{]Imcw s]mXp D¯chpIÄ {]Imcw kÀ¡mÀ A\phmZw sImSp¯n«pff aäp tPmenIÄ GsXms¡bmsW¶v Sn dqfn FSp¯p ]dªn«p­v.  Ahbn ap³ {]kvXmhn¨ klIcW kwL§Ä \S¯p¶ ]co£IÄ DÄs¸Sp¯nbn«nÃ.  AXpt]mse, kÀ¡mÀ DtZymKkvY³amcpsS s]cpamä N«§Ä {]Imchpw, CXp t]msebpff tPmenIÄ kzoIcn¡p¶Xn\v kÀ¡mcn \n¶pw A\phmZw hm§nbncnt¡­XmWv.  F¶m- N«{]Imcapff A\phmZw hm§msXbmWv Cu hIp¸nse Nne DtZymKkvY³amÀ, kwL§Ä \S¯p¶ ]co£ kw_Ôn¨ tPmenIÄ kzoIcn¡p¶Xv.

klIcW \nbaw/N«§Ä {]Imcw kwL§fpsS kq¸À hnj³, ]cntim[\ XpS§nbh \S¯p¶hcmWv Cu hIp¸nse DtZymKkvY³amÀ.  kwL§fn D­mIp¶ XÀ¡§fn a²ykvY·mcmbpw ChÀ {]hÀ¯nt¡­Xp­v.  Cu DtZymKkvY³amÀ Poh\¡msc \nban¡p¶Xn\p th­n kwL§Ä \S¯p¶ Fgp¯p ]co£ XpS§n GXp \S]SnIfnepw `mK`m¡mIp¶Xv DNnXasöp am{XaÃ, XoÀ¯pw Hgnhmt¡­XpamWv.  kwL§Ä \S¯p¶ \nba\§sf kw_Ôn¨v ]cmXnIÄ tIÄ¡m\pw \S]SnIÄ kzoIcn¡m\pw _m²ykvXcmb DtZymKkvY³amÀ , kwL§fnse \nba\ \S]SnIfn ]¦mfnIfmIp¶Xv icnbsöpffXv hyIvXamWv.  am{Xaà kwL§fnse \nba\§fn \S¡p¶ AgnaXnIsf¡pdn¨pw, Ahbn ]eXnepw hIp¸ptZymKkvY³amÀ Iq«p \n¡p¶Xp kw_Ôn¨pw ]e tI{µ§fn \n¶pw ]cmXnIÄ e`n¨p hcp¶pap­v.  ta ]dª kmlNcy§fn klIcW kwL§fnse \nba\¯n\pff \S]SnIfn \n¶pw hIp¸ptZymKkvY³amÀ ]qÀ®ambpw amdn \nÂt¡­Xv BhiyamsW¶v ImWp¶p.

klIcW kwL§Ä, Poh\¡msc \nban¡p¶Xn\p th­n \S¯p¶ ]co£sb kw_Ôn¨ tNmZy t]¸À X¿mdm¡Â, Fgp¯p]co£ \S¯Â, D¯c ISemÊp ]cntim[n¡Â, CâÀh} \S¯Â XpS§n bmsXmcp \S]SnIfnepw Cu hIp¸nse DtZymKkvY³amÀ DÄs¸ScpsX¶v \nÀt±in¡p¶p.  Cu \nÀt±i¯n\v hn]coXambn {]hÀ¯n¡p¶Xv KpcpXcamb Ipäambn ]cnKWn¨v in£W \S]Sn¡v ImcWamIpsa¶pw Adnbn¡p¶p.

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{SmÀ

No.T(2) 4972/90                    

Office of the Registrar of Co-operative societies,

                                             Trivandrum, 30-4-1990

CIRCULAR No. 19/90

Sub:           Disbursement of long-term loans simplification of procedure-Modification-reg.

Ref: 1.  This Office circular No. 89/80 dt.30-12-80 CLT (3) 41093/89

        2.  This office circular No.21/86dt 7-6-86 CLT (3) 6249/86

        3.  Lr. No. G1/1161/83 dt. 21-3-1990 from the Managing Director, KSCADB

As per provisions contained in para 2 (7) of the circular first cited, all Primary Co-operative Agricultural Development Banks were empowered to sanction loans upto and including Rs. 20,000/- Later, as per Circular No. 21/86 the limit of loans that can be sanctioned by Primary Co-operative Agricultural Development Banks was enhanced to Rs. 30,000/-

The Managing Director, Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural Development Bank in his letter 3rd cited has now requested to enhance the existing limit of loan sanctioning power of Primary Co-op: Agricultural Development Banks from 30,000/- to 50,000/- in respect of individual loan applications.

After considering the proposal in detail, the following instructions are issued in partial modification of this office circular 2nd cited.

2 (7)  power to sanction

All  Primary Co-op: Agricultural Development Banks are empowered to sanction loans up to and including a maximum limit of Rs. 50,000 to any one individual subject to the condition that in no case the total loan outstanding so sanctioned by the Primary Co-operative Agricultural Development Banks to any one member either as individual borrower or as co-borrower or both put together shall not exceed Rs. 50,000 where more than one loan is sanctioned to any particular member by a Primary Co-operative Agricultural Development Bank, it shall be ensured that the aggregate of all those loans does not come to more than Rs. 50,000.  In other words on sanctioning a second or subsequent loan to a member, if the Aggregate amount of loans sanctioned to him exceeds Rs. 50,000 such subsequent loan application shall be referred to the Kerala State Co-op; Agricultural Development Bank for sanction.  Loans exceeding Rs. 50,000 will be sanctioned by the Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural  Development Bank only.

K. Shamsuddin

Additional. Registrar (Credit)

in charge of Registrar of Co-operative Societies

\¼À C.F¨v.(2) 36184/90     

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{Smdm^okv

                                           Xncph\´]pcw, 18þ7þ90

kÀ¡peÀ \¼À 26/90

hnjbw:  klIcWwþ klIcW Poh\¡mÀ¡p {]tamj³ \ÂIp¶Xn\mbn tIcf klIcWkwLw dqfnse dqÄ 185 (2) {]Imcw hnZym`ymk tbmKyXbn Cfhv A\phZn¡p¶Xv þ kw_Ôn¨pff IqSpX \nÀt±i§Ä

kqN\:   Cu Hm^oknse 12þ4þ1989 se 22/89  \¼À kÀ¡peÀ

kqN\bnse kÀ¡peÀ {]Imcw klIcW Poh\¡mÀ¡v {]tamj³ \ÂIp¶Xn\mbn \nÀ±njvS hnZym`ymk tbmKyXIfnÂ\n¶pw klIcW kwLw N«¯nse N«w 185 (2) {]Imcw Cfhv A\phZn¡Wsa¶pff At]£Ifn Xocpam\w FSp¡p¶Xn\mbn hyIvXamb amÀ¤\nÀt±i§Ä \ÂInbncp¶p.  {]kvXpX amÀ¤ \nÀt±i§Ä {]Imcw Hcp Pnápffn {]hÀ¯\ ]cn[nbpff kwL§fnse Poh\¡msc {]tam«v sN¿p¶Xn\mbn hnZym`ymk tbmKyXbn Cfhv A\phZn¡p¶Xn\p th­nbpff At]£Ifn³ta AXmXp PnÃm tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀamÀ Xocpam\saSpt¡­XmsW¶p \nÀt±in¨ncp¶p.  \nÀ±njvS am\ZÞ§Ä ]qÀ®ambpw ]men¡m¯Xpw F¶m kwL¯nsâ D¯a XmÂ]cys¯ IcpXn Hcp Poh\¡mc\v DtZymK¡bäw \ÂIp¶Xn\v hnZym`ymk tbmKyXbn \n¶pw Cfhv A\phZnt¡­Xv A\nhmcyamsW¶v tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀ¡v t_m²ys¸Sp¶ ]£w A¯cw At]£IÄ Hcp {]tXyI tIÊmbn ]cnKWn¡p¶Xn\mbn ImcyImcW§tfmSp IqSn cPnkv{SmÀ¡v ip]mÀi sN¿mhp¶XmsW¶pw {]kvXpX kÀ¡pedn hyIvXam¡nbncp¶p.

kwL¯nsâ D¯a XmÂ]cys¯ IcpXn A\nhmcyamb At]£IÄ am{Xw Cu Hm^oknte¡v ip]mÀi sNbvXm aXnsb¶v \nÀt±iw \ne\nÂt¡, \nÀ±njvS am\ZÞw ]men¡m¯ At]£IÄ FÃmw Cu Hm^oknte¡v ip]mÀi sNbvXp hcp¶Xmbn {i²bn s]«ncn¡p¶p.  CXp ta kÀ¡peÀ \nÀt±i§Ä¡p hncp²amWv.  AXn\m  C¡mcy¯n Xmsg ]dbp¶ \nÀt±i§Ä ]pds¸Sphn¡p¶p.

1.     Hcp Pnápffn {]hÀ¯\ ]cn[nbpff kwL§fnse Poh\¡mÀ¡v {]tamj³ \ÂIp¶Xn\mbn \nÀ±njvS hnZym`ymk tbmKyXbn \n¶pw Cfhv A\phZn¡Wsa¶pff kwL§fpsS At]£Ifn ta kqN\bnse kÀ¡pednse am\ZÞ§fpsS ASnkvYm\¯n tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀamÀ Xs¶ Xocpam\saSpt¡­XmWv.

F¶m \nÀ±njvS am\ZÞ§Ä ]men¨n«nsænepw {]tXyI kmlNcy§fmtem {]tXyI ImcW§fmtem Cfhv A\phZnt¡­Xv BhiyamsW¶v t_m²ys¸Sp¶ kmlNcy§fn A¯c¯nepff At]£IÄ Imcy ImcW klnXw tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀamcpsS ip]mÀiItfmSp IqSn cPnkv{SmdpsS ]cnKW\¡mbn Ab¡mhp¶XmWv.

2.     Hcp PnÃtbm AXn IqSpXtem {]hÀ¯\ ]cn[nbpff kwL§fnse Poh\¡mÀ¡v {]tamj³ \ÂIp¶Xn\v  \nÀ±njvS hnZym`ymk tbmKyXbn Cfhv A\phZn¡Wsa¶pff At]£IÄ hyIvXamb iq]mÀiItfmsS Cu Hm^oknte¡v Adnbntí­XmWv.

3.     H¶mw \nÀt±i¯n\\pkcWambn Cu Hm^oknte¡v A]£IÄ iq]mÀi sN¿pt¼mÄ kwL¯nsâ At]£bpw aäv DffS¡§fpw Abt¡­XnÃ.  F¶m Cu kÀ¡pednt\mSv A\p_Ôn¨v DffS¡w sNbvXn«pff tNmZymhen FÃm hnhc§fpw hyIvXambn ImWn¨psIm­v icnbmb coXnbn ]qcn¸n¨v ip]mÀitbmsSm¸w \nÀ_Ôambpw Abt¡­XmWv.  tNmZymhenbnse FÃm tNmZy§Ä¡pw icnbmb D¯cw \ÂInbncnt¡­Xpw tNmZymhenbnse D¯c§Ä icnbmsW¶v _Ôs¸« bq\näv C³kvs]IvSdpw, Aknkväâv cPnkv{Smdpw tPmbnâv cPnkv{Smdpw km£ys¸Sp¯nbncnt¡­XpamWv.  Cu \nÀt±i§Ä FÃm tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀamcpw IrXyambn ]ment¡­XmWv.

sI. sP. tXmakv

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{SmÀ

No.CLT (2) 14100/90

Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies,

                                             Thiruvananthapuram, 25-8-1990

CIRCULAR No. 30/90

Sub:   Interest subsidy-maintenance charge collected by Primary Co-operative Agricultural Development Bank-refund of amount-direction-regarding.

Ref:   Government Letter No. 139/81/89/Coop. Dated 3-8-90

Government have received complaints that a Co-operative Bank has collected a fee known as “interest subsidy “maintenance charge” from the members.  The action of the Bank in this regard was not proper.  No society/Bank has been empowered to make such unauthorised collection in the name of a scheme sponsored by Government for giving relief to the poor agriculturists.  Government took strong objection to this irregular action of the Primary Co-operative Agricultural Development Bank and directed to stop this practice forthwith and also to refund all the amount so collected to the members immediately.

In the above circumstances all the Co-operative Agricultural Credit Societies and Primary Co-operative Agricultural  Development  Banks in the State are hereby directed to refund immediately the amount if any collected as interest subsidy maintenance charge or collected in any other name directly or indirectly from the members.  All Assistant Registrars (General) and (Audit) and Assistant Registrar/Valuation Officers of Primary Co-operative Agricultural Development Banks are instructed to verify and submit certificate the effect that the society/Bank has refunded the said amounts forthwith.  All Joint Registrars will see that such a certificate is attached to the future Claim for the arrears of interest subsidy before sanctioning the claims.

K. J. Thomas

Registrar of Co-operative Societies

No.ADL (2) 38195/90.          

Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies

                                                  Thiruvananthapuram, 4-10-1990

CIRCULAR No. 33/90

Sub:   Final audit reports of Co-operative Banks coming under the purview of Banking Regulation Act-Lack of required information notice-Instructions Issued.

Ref:   NB (T) No. POD (Credit limits)/2829/G 22/90-91  Dated 12-6-1990 from NABARD.

It has been observed by the NABARD from some of the audit reports of the District Co-operative Central Banks, for the year 1988-89 that the Departmental Statutory  Auditor’s reports do not contain complete and consolidated data regarding Demand, Collection and Balance position of all loans and advances. Further, NABARD has also observed that in some of the audit reports, the figures of total overdues under term loans are being reported without mentioning the corresponding figures of demand and collection and also that the percentage of overdues is being worked out with reference to the loans outstanding instead of demand.  In the above circumstances, the following instructions are issued for future guidance.

1.       The final audit reports of the Banks coming under the Banking Regulation Act should contain complete and consolidated data regarding Demand, Collection and Balance position of all loans and advances.

2.       The total overdues under term loans should be mentioned with the corresponding figures of demand and collection there against.

3.       The percentage of overdues under loans should be worked out with reference to the demand thereon.

As the correct informations regarding the above items are essential, in the audit reports while considering the banks application for sanction of credit limits by NABARD, the Concurrent Auditors of the District Co-operative Central Banks will ensure that the above instructions are strictly adhered to while preparing the audit reports of the banks.

The receipt of this circular should be acknowledged immediately.

K. J. Thomas

Registrar of Co-operative Societies

\¼À kn.]n.34067/89 

klIcW kwLw cPnkv{Smdm^okv,

                                          Xncph\´]pcw 1þ11þ1990

kÀ¡peÀ \¼À 34/90

hnjbw:  klIcW kwL§Äþ hmbv]m XpIIÄ A\ma¯v kkvs]³kv IW¡n hchv sh¡p¶Xv kw_Ôn¨v.

klIcW kwL§fn \n¶pw hmbv]m FSp¯n«pff AwK§Ä XpI XncnsI AS¡pt¼mÄ aXnbmb ImcWw IqSmsX {]kvXpX XpI AhcpsS t]cn A\ma¯v IW¡n hchv  sh¡pIbpw ]n¶oSv AXv hmbv]m IpSninI¡v hchv h¡pIbpw sN¿p¶ k{¼Zmbw Nne kwL§fn \nehnepffXmbn {i²bn s]«ncn¡p¶p.  C§s\ A\ma¯v IW¡pIfn hchv sh¡p¶Xnepw AXmXp AwK§fpsS hmbv]m IW¡pIfn bYm kabw hmbv]m hchv hcmXncn¡pIbpw, X³ aqew hchv h¡p¶Xn\p­mIp¶ ImeXmak¯n\v ]enibpw, ]ng ]enibpw _Ôs¸« AwKw HSpt¡­ kmlNcyhpw D­mIp¶p. \ymbamb ImcWanÃmsX C§s\ sNbvXp hcp¶Xv kwL§Ä Hgnhmt¡­XmWv.  hmbv]¡mcsâ tcJmaqeamb \nÀt±ianÃmsX hmbv]m XpI Xncn¨S¡pt¼mÄ A\ma¯mbn hchv sh¡m³ ]mSnÃm¯Xpw, Hgnhm¡m\mIm¯ GsX¦nepw kmlNcy¯n A§s\ sN¿pIbmsW¦n t]mepw A\ma¯v IW¡n hchv sh¨ XobXn apX ]eni IW¡m¡m³ ]mSnÃm¯XpamWv. 

skbnem^okÀamÀ aptJ\ e`n¡p¶ XpIIÄ, kwL§Ä A¶pXs¶ _Ôs¸« IpSninI¡mcsâ hmbv]m IW¡pIfnte¡v hchv sht¡­Xpw IpSninI¡mc³ XpI AS¨n«pw ]eni ho­pw \ÂtI­n hcp¶ kmlNcyw Hgnhmt¡­XpamWv. 

ta \nÀt±i§Ä FÃm kwL§fpw ]men¡p¶ps­¶v _Ôs¸« hIp¸ptZymKkvY³amÀ Dd¸p hcpt¯­XmWv. 

sI. sP  .tXmakv

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{SmÀ

No. LO 56028/90.      

Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies,

                                             Trivandrum, 9-11-1990

CIRCULAR No. 35/90

Sub:   Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, (Kerala), Ss. 100 & 69 (1) Award of Arbitrator in excess of the bond executed by the guarantor-Challenged in appeal and by way of writ petition Dismissed-It can be challenged in Civil Suit-Civil P.C. 1908, S.9.

This is to bring to the notice of the departmental officers that in Avanavancherry H. W. Co-op: Society V. Chellamma (1990 (1) KLT 192), the Hon. High Court of Kerala had examined the effect of provisions contained in Ss. 69 (1) (h) and 100 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.

The facts leading to the filing of the suit is summarised as follows:-The 2nd defendant is the plaintiff.  First defendant Society was engaged in manufacturing and selling handloom textiles and it had a depot at Neendakara. The 2nd defendant was appointed as a Salesman in the said depot.  Plaintiff executed a bond in favour of the 1st  defendant society undertaking to reimburse the society any sum upto the maximum limit of Rs. 2,000/- on the ground of misappropriation, 1st defendant society terminated the service of the 2nd defendant. At the instance of the 1st defendant, a claim against the plaintiff and 2nd defendant was referred to an Arbitrator.  The Arbitrator, in Arbitration Case No. 5 of 1973 passed an award in favour of 1st defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs, 16,721.21 from plaintiff and 2nd defendant.  It appears that an appeal filed by the plaintiff and 2nd defendant was dismissed, plaintiff also appears to have filed the above suit for a declaration that the arbitration award was null and void and also for a permanent injunction restraining the 1st defendant from realising any sum from the plaintiff in excess of Rs. 2,000/- in execution of the award in the arbitration proceedings No. 5 of 1973.

The gist of the decision of the Hon. High Court is reproduced below:

“The  trail court held that the award passed by the Arbitrator in the instant case was in excess of jurisdiction and a nullity in view of the fact that the bond executed by plaintiff provided for reimbursement only to the extent of Rs. 2,000/- and that the award passed against the plaintiff in the instant case is one exceeding this limit and that therefore Ss. 69 (1) (h) and 100 of the Act will not be a bar to a civil suit. Even assuming that there is such a provision in the bond, that is a matter which should have been pleaded by plaintiff before the Arbitrator.  If she had failed to raise the plea in Arbitration proceedings or in appeal and the award become final,  it shall operate as res judicata. The award was passed only after giving full opportunities to the plaintiff and 2nd defendant to raise their contentions.  The rules of natural justice and mandatory procedural provisions were fully complied with.  That being the position, the order cannot be said to be a nullity.  Nor  can it be said that any illegal order passed by the Arbitrator would be a nullity or void.  It would be a binding order unless it is reversed in appeal review or revision by the Co-operative Tribunal or other appropriate proceeding provided for by law.  If the plaintiff failed to raise any plea which she ought to have raised in the arbitration proceedings, that would operate as res judicate in subsequent proceedings.  The fact that award provided for recovery of amounts exceeding the limit provided for in the bond would not take the effect of the bar to a civil suit created under Ss. 69 (1) (h) and 100 of the Act.”

All Officers in this Department will note the above decision of the Hon. High Court for future guidance.

K. J. Thomas

Registrar of Co-operative Societies

\¼À C._n.7/51025/90.

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{Smdm^okv,

                                           Xncph\´]pcw 8þ11þ1990

kÀ¡peÀ \¼À 36/90

hnjbw: klIcW kÀ¡nÄ B^okpIfnse bqWnäv C³kvs]IvSÀamÀ AhÀ¡p e` n¡p¶ X]mepIfpw ssIhiapff ^bepIsf kw_Ôn¨ hnhc§fpw FgpXn kq£n¡p¶Xv kw-_Ôn¨v.

kqN\:   7þ8þ90 Â tImgnt¡mSp h¨p IqSnb tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmdptSbpw Aknkväâv cPnkv{SmdptSbpw kt½f\w.

kqN\ kt½f\¯n Ct¸mÄ P\d hn`mKw Aknkväâv cPnkv{SmÀ B^okpIfnse Hmtcm bqWnäv C³kvs]IvSdptSbpw ssIhiw GsX¦nepw ^bepIÄ dnt¸mÀ«n\mbn _m¡nbps­¶Xns\ kw_Ôn¨v hyIvXamb bmsXmcp tcJIfpw kq£n¡p¶nsöv a\ÊnembXnsâ ASnkvYm\¯n Xmsg ]dbp¶ \nÀt±i§Ä \ÂIp¶p.

X]mepIÄ Aknkväâv cPnkv{SmÀ B^okn kzoIcn¨ tijw {Ia\¼À apd¡v cPnkvädn tcJs¸Sp¯pIbpw s]mXpkz`mhw Dffh B^oknse ¢mÀ¡v X³ ]XnthSn tNÀ¯p \S]SnIÄ FSpt¡­Xpw C³kvs]IvSÀ ssIImcyw sNt¿­h X]m cPnkväÀ aptJ\ _Ôs¸« bqWnäv C³kvs]IvSdpsS H¸p hm§nb tijw sImSpt¡­XpamIp¶p.  X³ ]XnthSv FgpXn kq£nt¡­Xnsâ NpaXe ¢mÀ¡n\mbncn¡pw.  _Ôs¸« bqWnäv C³kvs]IvSÀ/skbn B^okÀ Xmsg ]dbp¶ hnhc§Ä Adnb¯¡ hn[¯nepff Hcp cPnkväÀ IrXyambn FgpXn kq£nt¡­XmWv.

{Ia \¼À	X]m cPnkvädnse {Ia \¼À	GsäSp¯ X]mense hnhcw Npcp¡¯nÂ	e`n¨ XobXn	dnt¸mÀ«v \ÂtI­ XobXn	kzoIcn¨ \S]SnbpsS hnhcw Npcp¡¯nÂ	dnt¸mÀ«v \ÂInb XobXn	H¸v
1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8

X]mens\ kw_Ôn¨v Ipdn¡pt¼mÄ kwL¯nsâ t]cpw hnjbhpw tcJs¸Sp¯Ww. Aknkväâv cPnkv{SmdpsS {Ia \¼dpw Sn cPnkvädn tcJs¸Spt¯­XmWv.  Cu cPnkväÀ Aknkväâv cPnkv{SmÀ amk¯n Hcp {]mhiysa¦nepw ]cntim[n¨v Xr]vXns¸«p km£ys¸Spt¯­XmWv.  s]mXp kz`mhapff tIkpIfnepw C³kvs]IvSÀamcpsS dnt¸mÀ«v Bhiys¸«m B hnhchpw C³kvs]IvSÀamcpsS cPnkvädpIfn tcJs¸Spt¯­XmWv.  tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀamÀ kÀ¡nÄ Hm^okpIÄ kµÀin¡pt¼mgpw Cu cPnkvädpIÄ ]cntim[n¨v A`n{]mbw tcJs¸Spt¯­XmWv.  1990 \hw_À amkw 12 mw XobXn apX Cu kÀ¡pednse \nÀt±i§Ä¡v {]m_eyap­mbncn¡pw.

sI. sP. tXmakv

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{SmÀ

No.LO.53907/90.    

Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies

                                              Thiruvananthapuram, 17-11-1990

CIRCULAR No. 37/90

Sub:   Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (Kerala), S.68-Conditions precedent to attract the section-Facts giving rise to the charge have to be disclosed in the course of an audit under S.63, inquiry under S.66 or winding up of Society-Wilful negligence meaning of-Negligence simpliciter is not sufficient-Conditions necessary to attract the section.

This is to bring to the notice of the Departmental officers that in A.K. Francis v. Joint Registrar (1990 (2) KLT 470) the Hon. High Court of Kerala had elaborately examined the conditions precedent to attract S.68 and the interpretation of the word “wilful negligence” appearing in various enactments with reference to the case law decided by the learned English and Indian Judges.

The facts and decisions of the case are narrated below:-

The petitioner in the above O.P. was the Chief Promoter and Director of the Thiroor Service Co-operative Bank Limited (the Bank for short), and its president since 1964,  The Bank is a Co-operative Society registered under the Act.  The Managing Committee of the society had passed resolutions from time to time sanctioning payment of conveyance allowance to the petitioner at the rate of Rs. 100/- from  1.1.1976, Rs. 150/- from 1.1.1978, Rs.250/- from 1.7.1979, Rs.300/- from 7.1.1981 and Rs. 450/- from 1.7.1982.  The petitioner had drawn the conveyance allowance accordingly at the rates sanctioned amongst others, during the period from 2.2.1982 to 31.10.1983.

The society had purchased a car for its purposes.  But  no driver was appointed.  The vehicle was being driven by the petitioner himself.  The vehicle was available for use between 1.2.1982 to 31.10.1983.

The budgets presented for the approval of the General Body of the bank every year from 1978-79 to 1984-85 had made provision for the amount of conveyance allowance payable to the petitioner at the prevailing rates.  The General Body had not raised any objection to the payment at any time.  The payment of the conveyance allowance had thus the approval of the General Body of the Bank.

Some members of the Bank had filed petition before the first respondent Joint Registrar alleging mal-administration by the managing committee headed by the petitioner.  A resolution was also passed  at a meeting of the General Body held on 25-11-1984  to disallow the conveyance allowance due to the  petitioner from 1-2-1982 to 31-10-1983, one of the irregularities alleged in the petition mentioned above was regarding the payment of  conveyance allowance to the petitioner.  On receipt of this petition, the Joint Registrar directed the Assistant Registrar (Vigilance), Trichur to conduct an enquiry.  On the basis of the report of the Assistant Registrar, the first respondent issued notice Ext. P 13 dated  24-6-1985 directing the petitioner to show-cause why an order should not be passed under section 68 surcharging him for the amount of conveyance allowance of Rs. 9,000- received between 1-2-1982 and 31-10-1983.  The notice Ext. P13 stated that the drawing of the allowance was due to “wilful negligence” and thereby the petitioner had wilfully caused deficiency of Rs. 9,000-in the assets of the Bank.

The petitioner  showed cause but that was not accepted by the first respondent and he passed the order Ext., P.13A directing recovery of Rs. 9,000 with interest at 18% per annum from 31-10-1983 from the petitioner.  In making this direction the first respondent was not prepared to give credit for the resolutions of the managing committee sanctioning the payment.  It was stated that “as  the first officer” of the Bank, petitioner cannot absolve himself of his responsibility in this fashion by relying on the managing committee’s resolutions.  The petitioner’s contention that the Act or the Rules or the bye-laws did not prohibit such payment was treated as negative.  “This again adds that he was wilfully neglected  reasoning”.  It was  also held that the petitioner had not given the log book and tour notes to the Bank.  Further  the General Body resolution  of 25-11-1984 had objected to the amount.  For all these reasons the order of recovery of Rs. 9,000/- was passed, as stated above.

The Petitioner  challenged the order unsuccessfully in appeal and Ext. P 17 is the ultimate order of the Government in the appeal after the reconsideration ordered by this court.

The question for consideration is whether the action is valid and wether it is justified under S.68 of the Act, S 68 reads:

“68. Surcharge:- (1) If in the course of an audit, inquiry, inspection or the winding up of a society, it is found that any person, who is or was entrusted with the organisation or management of such society or who is or has at any time been an officer or an employee of the society, has made any payment contrary to this Act, the rules  or the bye-laws, or had caused any deficiency in the assets of the society by breach of trust or wilful negligence or has misappropriated or fraudulently retained any money or their property belonging to such society or has destroyed or caused the destruction of the records, the Registrar may, of his own motion or on the application of the committee, liquidator or any creditor, inquire himself or direct any person authorised by him by an order in writing in this behalf to inquire into the conduct of such person”.

The first requirement of the section, which constitutes the condition precedent to its operation is that the payment contemplated or the deficiency in the assets of the societies should have been found in the course of audit, inquiry, inspection or the winding up of the society.  The section can be invoked by the Registrar only if the finding was made in this manner and not otherwise.  The facts giving rise to the charge have to be disclosed in the course of an audit under S. 63, inquiry under S. 65, inspection under S.66 or on the winding up of the society.

There is no case that the disclosure about the conveyance allowance was made in the curse of any audit or inspection.  The inquiry ordered by the first respondent on the complain petition was also not one under S. 65 of the Act.  Therefore the essential condition for S. 68 to be invoked did not exist and the entire proceedings leading to Exts. P. 13.A and P.17 have to fall as wanting in jurisdiction.

The further requirement of S. 68 is that the payment or deficiency in the assets  of the society was made, or caused by breach of trust or wilful negligence or misappropriation or fraudulent retention of money.  It is not the mere wrongful payment or causing of deficiency in the assets that attract S. 68, but the further fact that such payment or deficiency was made or caused by the breach of trust, wilful negligence, misappropriation or fraud of the persons concerned.  Unless  the latter ingredient is found to exist, action under S 68 is ruled out.

The charge against the petitioner is that he wilfully neglected the legal aspects.  The respondent’s case is that he was wilfully negligent, though it is not clarified as to how he was wilfully negligent.  The cliche  ‘wilful neglect’ finds a place in Ext.P.13.A.  But Government does not find wilful negligence on the part of petitioner anywhere in Ext.P.17 though they uphold the action of the Joint Registrar.  The question therefore, is whether the petitioner  is guilty of such negligence as would justify action under S.68 assuming that he has caused deficiency of Rs. 9,000/- in the assets of the Bank.

Having regard to the interpretations and discussions in respect of the term “wilful” appearing in various enactments, as found in the case-law  decided by the learned English and Indian Judges which serve as a guide to the construction of the term ‘wilful’ used in S.71(1) of the Act, I am of view that in order to  pass a surcharge order under that section against a person entrusted with the organisation and management of a cooperative society or an officer or servant there of, such person should have done an actionable wrong, either by commission or omission, in a deliberate and reprehensible manner, with reckless callousness and with a supine indifference (but not by accident or inadvertence), without taking due care and precaution ordinarily expected  from a reasonable and prudent man under those existing circumstances, that is to say, not caring what the result of his carelessness would be.  To make it explicit, it may be stated that he should have acted in breach of legal obligations or in conscious disregard of duty or with an intentional failure to perform the manifest duty, in the performance of which the public have an interest, and that such commission should be the proximate cause of the loss or deficiency in question.

The uniform trend of decisions is therefore, that negligence simpliciter is not sufficient to visit the officer of a Co-operative society with proceedings under S.68.  His conduct should be wilful, implying culpability with an element  of deliberateness or mensrea involved in the conduct or omission which resulted in the loss.  Without such conduct or omission, resulting in loss to the society, the Registrar is not entitled to proceed under S.68. or to pass an order of surcharge.

Proceedings for surcharge are serious in their import, akin to misfeasance proceedings under S. 543 of the Companies Act.  Under that Act however, the procedure is elaborate as in civil cases, and the person concerned gets full opportunity of putting forward his pleas before the High Court in relation to the charge of misfeasance or malfeasance.  On the other hand, the proceedings under S. 68 are at a departmental level, at the level of the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies in ordinary cases, with only the remedy of an appeal to Government.  It is therefore, imperative that the special statutory remedy of surcharge is invoked only if the conditions prescribed by S.68 are strictly complied with.  A person can be proceeded against, and visited with liability, only if an objective assessment of the evidence  and the materials available on record leads to the irresistible inference that the person concerned is guilty of one or other of the acts specified in the section. A mere routine, mechanical chanting of the section or of the acts mentioned, without anything more, is not sufficient in law to sustain an order of surcharge.  It should be based on relevant and adequate materials on which a court could satisfy itself that the person concerned was guilty of breach of trust, wilful negligence, misappropriation or fraud.

The gist of the decision is reproduced below for the information of all officers of this department.

“The first requirement of the section, which constitutes the condition precedent for it’s operation, is that the payment contemplated or the deficiency in the assets of the society should have been found in the course of audit, inquiry, inspection or the winding up of the society.  The section can be invoked by the Registrar only if the finding was upmade in this manner and not otherwise.  The facts giving rise to the charge have to be disclosed in the course of an audit under S. 63, inquiry under S. 65 inspection under S.69 or on the winding up of the society.

There is no case that the disclosure about the conveyance allowance was made in the course of audit or inspection-  The enquiry ordered by the first respondent or the complaint petition was also not one under S. 65 of the Act.  Therefore, the essential condition for S.68 to be invoked did not exist and the entire proceedings leading to Exts. P. 13A and P.17 have to fall as wanting in jurisdiction.

The further requirement of S.68 is that the payment or deficiency in the assets of the society was made or caused by breach of trust or wilful negligence or misappropriation or fraudulent retention of money.  It is not the mere wrongful payment or causing of deficiency in the assets that attracts S. 68, but the further fact that such payment or deficiency was made or caused by the breach of trust, wilful negligence, misappropriation or fraud of the person concerned.  Unless the latter ingredient is found to exist, action under S. 68 is ruled out.  Negligence simpliciter is not sufficient to visit  the officer of a Co-operative society with proceedings under S.68.  His  conduct should be wilful, implying  culpability with an element of deliberateness or mensrea involved in the conduct or omission which resulted in the loss.  Without such conduct or omission, resulting in loss to the society, the Registrar is not entitled to proceed under S.68 or to pass an order of surcharge.  A person can be proceed against, and visited with liability, only if an objective assessment of the evidence and the materials available on record leads to the irresistible inference that the person concerned is guilty of one or other of the acts specified in the section.  A mere routine, mechanical chanting of the section or of the acts mention, without anything more, is not sufficient in law to sustain an order of surcharge.  It should be based on relevant and adequate materials on which a court could satisfy itself that the person concerned was guilty of breach of trust, wilful negligence, misappropriation or fraud”.

All the officers in this Department will note the above decision of the Hon.High Court for future guidance.

K. J. Thomas

Registrar of Co-operative Societies

No.CG(1) 48440/90 (1)         

Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies,

                                               Trivandrum, 15-12-1990

CIRCULAR No. 38/90

Sub:      Endorsement in Ration Cards for Loans upto Rs. 50,000/- Instruction issued.

Read:    1.  G.O.(MS) No. 17/85 dated 17-12-1985.

         2. G.O.(MS) No. 5/87/F&CS dated 25-4-1987

         3. This office circular No. 11/88 dated 20-2-1988 (in file No. CLT (2) 794/88)

         4. Letter No. TC.LBPS/101/1972/MS dated, 8-9-1990 of the Convenor, State Level Banker’s Committee.

1.       As per order 1st cited, Government have permitted the financial institutions to make endorsement in the Ration Cards regarding loan granted upto Rs. 50,000/- . For this purpose, one folio has been left blank in the ration cards issued form 1985-86.  As per reference 2nd cited, the Banks and other financial institutions are permitted to make the endorsements.

2.       In this office Circular 3rd cited, instructions had been issued to all Co-operative Credit institutions in the State to make use of the provision in the Ration Cards and make the endorsements when loans upto Rs. 50,000/- are granted to their members by making the endorsement in the folio prescribed therein.  The Joint Registrars had been requested to see that the societies concerned strictly adhere to the above instructions.

3.       As per reference 4th cited, the State Level Banker’s Committee has again pointed out that despite the instructions given as above, the co-operative Society Banks are not making the endorsements in the Ration Cards while granting loans, which creates problems.

4.       In the above circumstances, all the Co-operative Credit institutions of the State  are instructed once again to scrupulously follow the instructions issued in the office circular 3rd cited, while granting loans to their members.

5.       The Joint Registrars will ensure that the Co-operative institutions adhere to the instructions already issued.

K. J. Thomas

Registrar of Co-operative Societies

\¼À C.Fw.(2) 51267/89      

klIcW kwLw cPnkv{SmÀ B^okv

                                       Xncph\´]pcw, 23þ6þ1990

klIcW kwLw cPnkv{SmÀ

Xncph\´]pcw

FÃm tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀamÀ¡pw

kÀ,

hnjbw:  t»m¡v hnIk\kanXnIfn AwK§fmbn \ntbmKn¡ s¸«n«pff klIcW kwLw Poh\¡mÀ¡v kvs]j Imjz eohv A\phZn¡p¶Xv kw_Ôn¨v .

kqN\:   19þ1þ90 se Pn.H.(Fw.Fkv) 2/90 þkl: \¼À D¯chv

tIcf klIcW kwLw N«w 190 (8) A\pkcn¨v klIcW kvYm]\§fnse Poh\¡mÀ¡v tIcf kÀhokvN«§Ä {]Imcw kÀ¡mÀ Poh\¡mÀ¡v A\phZ\obamb FÃm Ah[nIÀ¡pw AÀlXbp­v. t»m¡v hnIk\ kanXn AwK§fmbn kÀ¡mÀ Poh\¡msc \ntbmKn¡m¯Xn\m t»m¡v hnIk\ kanXn tbmK§fn ]s¦Sp¡p¶Xn\v {]tXyIw Imjz eohv A\phZn¡p¶Xns\¸än sI.Fkv.BÀ. hyhkvYbnÃ.

klIcW kvYm]\§fnse Poh\¡msc t»m¡v hnIk\ kanXn AwK§fmbn \ntbmKn¡mdp­v.  C{]Imcw \ntbmKn¡s¸Sp¶ klIcW kwLw Poh\¡mÀ¡v t»m¡v hnIk\ kanXnbpsS tbmK§fn ]s¦Sp¡p¶Xn\mbn kqN\bn ImWn¨ncn¡p¶ D¯chv {]Imcw Hcp hÀj¯n ]¯n IqSmsX {]tXyIw Imjz eohn\v AÀlXbps­¶v kÀ¡mÀ hyIvXam¡nbn«p­v. 

Cu hnhcw FÃm klIcW kvYm]\§tfbpw Adnbn¡Wsa¶v Xm¸cys¸Sp¶p.

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{SmÀ¡p th­n

COURT DIRECTION / IMMEDIATE

No. EM (2) 17426 /90              Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies

                                                 Trivandrum, 8-7-1990

From

Registrar of Co-operative Societies

To

1.  All Joint Registrars in the Districts

2.  All Deputy Registrars (Audit)

Sub:   Payment of Gratuity to the employees of Co-op. Societies – Reg.

Ref:   This Office letter No.Em (2) 27024/87 dt.27-11-1987.

While disposing of O.P. No. 9220/88V the High Court of Kerala in their Judgement  dt. 8-3-90 held that the instructions by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies as per the letter under reference is unsustainable since it is discrimination and arbitrary.  The court quash the above instruction of the Registrar.  Relevant extracts of the Judgement are reproduced below:-

Assuming that such an argument is possible, I feel that it is the duty of the Court to read that the interpretation which is more favourable to the employees that otherwise it is clear that Co-operative Societies employing more than 10 employees pay Gratuity on the basis of total monthly emoluments as provided in the Payment of Gratuity Act 1972.  It is also agreed that gratuity is calculated in the case of Govt. servants on the basis of basic pay only.  I do not find any justification why persons like the petitioner should be paid gratuity based only on a portion of pay.

In this view I am to the opinion that Ext. P1 is unsustainable, since it is discriminatory and arbitrary, I hereby quash the same.  There will be a direction that the gratuity due to the petitioner will be calculated on the basis of aggregate emoluments AND NOT WITH  the reference to the basic pay as has done.

In the circumstances you are informed that the Gratuity to the Employees of Co-operative Societies not coming under the purview of the Payment of Gratuity Act 1972 is to be calculated on the basis of aggregate emoluments and not on the basic pay as instructed in the letter cited.

The provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act 1972 are applicable to those employees who come under the purview of the Act.

For Registrar of Co-operative Societies

\¼À C.Fw.(2) 2054/90               

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{Smdm^okv,

                                           Xncph\´]pcw, 19þ7þ90

kÀ,

hnjbw: IShÃqÀ kÀhokv klIcW _m¦v ¢n]vXw \¼À 3023 hm¨vam³ XkvXnI A\phZn¡p¶Xv i¼f kvsIbn \nÀ®bn¡p¶Xv kw_Ôn¨v

kqN\:   Xm¦fpsS 13þ3þ90 se kn.BÀ.]n.1343/90 \¼À I¯v. 

{]mYanI klIcW kwL§fn kwL¯nsâ {]h¯\ kz`mhw IW¡nseSp¯v Aknkväâv cPnkv{SmdpsS ap³IqÀ   A\paXntbmSp IqSn hm¨vam³ XkvXnI krjvSn¡mhp¶XmWv.  A§s\ krjvSn¡s¸Sp¶ hm¨vam³ XkvXnIIÄ ]}¬ XkvXnI¡\pkcn¨pff i¼f kvsIbn A\phZn¨p sImSp¡mhp¶XmWv.

klIcW kwLw cPnkv{SmÀ¡p th­n

\¼À C.Fw.(2) 653/90        

klIcW kwLw cPnkv{Smdm^okv,

                                          Xncph\´]pcw, 24þ9þ90

klIcWkwLw cPnkv{SmÀ

Xncph\´]pcw

FÃm tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀamÀ¡pw

kÀ,

hnjbw:  {]mYanI klIcW kwL§fnse k_v kväm^v hn`mK ¯nÂs¸« Poh\¡msc Pq\nbÀ ¢mÀ¡pamcmbn \nban¡p¶Xp kw_Ôn¨v.

kqN\: 1. Cu Hm^oknse 28þ9þ82 se 44/92 \w]À kÀ¡peÀ

        2. Cu Hm^oknse 25þ8þ84 se 37/84 \w: kÀ¡peÀ.

        3. Cu Hm^oknse 12þ4þ89 se 22/89 \w: kÀ¡peÀ.

kqN\bnse H¶pw c­pw kÀ¡pedpIÄ {]Imcw {]mYanI klIcW kwL§fn ]}¬, Aä³UÀ, skbnÂkvam³, ktämÀ Io¸À, Unt¸m amt\PÀ, _n IfIväÀ, Ass{]kÀ  XpS§nb k_v kväm^v hn`mK§fnÂs¸« Poh\¡mÀ, Fkv.Fkv.FÂ.kn.tbm AXn\p apIfntem hnZym`ymk tbmKyXbpffhcpw, sP.Un.kn./F¨v.Un.kn.]co£IÄ ]mÊmbn«pffhcpw AhÀ tPmen sN¿p¶ kwL¯n XpSÀ¨bmbn ap¶p hÀjw apgph³ hsc Poh\¡mcmbn tkh\w A\pjvTn¨hcpamsW¦nÂ, A¯cw Poh\¡msc {]kvXpX  kwL¯n Pq\nbÀ ¢mÀ¡v XkvXnIbn amän \nban¡mhp¶XmsW¶pw CXp kw_Ôn¨v kwL§fpsS ^oUÀ ImäKdnIfn Bhiyamb hyhkvYIÄ DÄs¡mffn¡mhp¶XmsW¶pw \nÀt±in¨ncp¶p.

k_v kväm^v hnmK¯nÂs¸« Poh\¡msc Pq\nbÀ ¢mÀ¡mbn amän \nban¡p¶Xv Hcp {]tamj\mbn ImW¡m¡mhp¶XÃ.  AXp {Sm³kv^À aptJ\bpff Hcp \nba\w am{XamWv. BbXn\m k_v kväm^v hn`mK¯nÂs¸« Poh\¡mÀ¡v Pq\nbÀ ¢mÀ¡pamcmbn \nban¡s¸Sp¶Xn\v klIcW N«w 185 (2) {]Imcw \nivNnX  hnZym`ymk tbmKyXbn \n¶v Cfhp e`n¡p¶Xn\ÀlXbnÃ.

kqN\ aq¶nse kÀ¡peÀ {]Imcw klIcW Poh\¡mÀ¡v {]tamj³ \ÂIp¶Xn\mbn N«w 185 (2) {]Imcw \nivNnX hnZym`ymk tbmKyXbn \n¶pw Cfhv \ÂIp¶Xv kw_Ôn¨v ]pds¸Sphn¨ amÀ¤\nÀt±i§fn ta kqNn¸n¨ hkvXpX hyIvXam¡nbn«p­v.  CXpkcn¨v k_vkväm^v ImäKdnbnÂs¸« Poh\¡mÀ¡v ¢mÀ¡mbn \nba\w e`n¡p¶Xn\v s{Sbn\nwKv tbmKyXbn \n¶pw Hgnhm¡p¶Xn\mbn {]tXyI ]cnKW\ t]mepw A\phZ\obaÃ.

F¶m Sn \nÀt±i§Ä ]e tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀamcpw IrXyambn ]men¨p ImWp¶nÃ.  kqN\bnse kÀ¡pedpIÄ {]Imcapff \nÀt±i§Ä FÃm tPmbnâv cPnkv{SmÀamcpw IrXyambn ]ment¡­XmWv.  Cu \nÀt±i§Ä ]men¡p¶Xn hogvN hcp¯p¶Xv KpcpXcamb IrXy hntem]ambn IW¡m¡n \S]SnIÄ kzoIcn¡p¶XmsW¶dnbn¡p¶p.

Xm¦fpsS hnizkvX³

klIcW kwLw cPnkv{SmÀ¡p th­n